Res Gestae Principle In Indian Law
1. What is Res Gestae?
The term “Res Gestae” literally means "things done" or "things that happened." It refers to statements or facts which form part of the same transaction or event and are considered so closely connected with the principal fact that they explain or illustrate it.
In evidence law, Res Gestae refers to a rule of admissibility of certain statements or acts which are spontaneous, contemporaneous with an event, and form part of the overall fact or transaction in question.
2. Legal Position in India
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, does not specifically mention “Res Gestae” but recognizes the principle under various sections:
Section 6: Statements made by a person who is dead or cannot be found, about the cause of his death or any relevant fact.
Section 7: Things said or done by any person which explain or illustrate a fact in issue or relevant fact.
Section 8: When facts are so connected as to form part of the same transaction, they become relevant.
The Res Gestae principle allows certain otherwise inadmissible statements (like hearsay) to be admitted as evidence because they are considered reliable, spontaneous, and part of the event.
3. Importance of Res Gestae in Criminal Law
Helps to bring spontaneous statements or conduct of persons present at the scene of the crime.
It aids in reconstructing the facts, clarifying the circumstances, and understanding the event as a whole.
Courts rely on it to admit evidence that otherwise would be rejected as hearsay.
4. Landmark Case Laws on Res Gestae Principle in Indian Law
Case 1: K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra (1962)
Facts:
The accused shot dead his wife’s lover and claimed it was an act of sudden passion.
Legal Issue:
Whether the accused’s spontaneous statements and conduct at the time of the incident were admissible under Res Gestae?
Holding:
The Supreme Court admitted statements and actions closely connected to the main event under the Res Gestae principle. It held that such spontaneous declarations help understand the chain of events and intentions of the accused.
Significance:
This case emphasized that spontaneous statements and acts done in the heat of the moment form part of Res Gestae and are admissible even if they may be hearsay otherwise.
Case 2: Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980)
Facts:
In a murder case, the victim made certain spontaneous statements identifying the assailant while being attacked.
Legal Issue:
Are the victim's immediate statements admissible as Res Gestae?
Holding:
The Supreme Court held that immediate and spontaneous declarations made at the time of the event, which explain the circumstances of the event, qualify as Res Gestae and are admissible.
Significance:
The case reinforced that statements made by a victim in extremis are reliable and form part of the facts constituting the transaction.
Case 3: Bhayani Ramprasad Mahipatray v. State of Gujarat (1968)
Facts:
The accused argued against the admissibility of a dying declaration.
Legal Issue:
Whether dying declarations are admissible under Res Gestae principles?
Holding:
The Court held that dying declarations are a classic example of Res Gestae. Since the person is under the shadow of death, such declarations are made spontaneously without time for concoction and thus are trustworthy.
Significance:
This case firmly established the rule that dying declarations form part of Res Gestae and are admissible evidence.
Case 4: Ratan Singh v. State of Punjab (1965)
Facts:
The victim was attacked and made certain statements identifying the assailants.
Legal Issue:
Are these immediate utterances admissible as part of Res Gestae?
Holding:
The Court admitted the statements as they were made immediately after the attack, without time for reflection, and explained the facts of the event. Hence, the statements formed part of Res Gestae.
Significance:
The case highlighted that the time factor and spontaneity are crucial to the application of the Res Gestae principle.
Case 5: Ram Lakhan v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977)
Facts:
The accused claimed that the witnesses' statements were hearsay and should not be admitted.
Legal Issue:
Whether statements made by witnesses about events occurring at the crime scene qualify as Res Gestae?
Holding:
The Supreme Court held that statements and acts which explain or form part of the same transaction are relevant and admissible under Section 6 to 8 of the Evidence Act, even if they are otherwise hearsay.
Significance:
This case broadens the scope of Res Gestae to include acts and statements which elucidate the facts in issue and form part of the same transaction.
5. Summary: Key Principles of Res Gestae in Indian Law
Res Gestae allows spontaneous statements or acts contemporaneous with the event to be admissible, even if they are hearsay.
Statements must be:
Spontaneous and immediate (not after time to concoct),
Made by a person directly involved or affected,
Connected to the main event or transaction.
Includes dying declarations, declarations at the scene, conduct illustrating the facts, and statements explaining the circumstances.
Helps to reconstruct the chain of events and clarify the main facts.
Applied under Sections 6, 7, and 8 of the Indian Evidence Act.
RELATED Blog
0 comments